The Small-Scale Approach in Wastewater Treatment

Chapter

Abstract

The wastewater treatment is an essential practice and is one of the forefront new worldwide challenges. Indeed, the today aims in wastewater management are profoundly changing. The sanitization processes are of course essential, but now some more efforts are required not only to reduce the environmental impact of the effluent regarding the receiving water body, for example, in terms of organic load, but also to provide management practices to allow water recovery, recycle and reuse. This means that treated wastewater are new resources that may be reused according to their final level of quality. New technological facilities are available, some more are expected in the near future, and innovative scaling approaches are strongly encouraged too. Actually, sometimes extensive sewage collection systems are no more cost-effective, thus decentralisation treatment processes considering small-scale wastewater treatment plants may represent a potential solution in both developed and developing countries. Furthermore, this kind of approach will strengthen those areas that are historically affected by drought phenomena or are expected to suffer from water scarcities in the near future as a consequence of climate change.

Keywords

Mixed Liquor Suspended Solid Receive Water Body Side Stream Toilet Flushing Secondary Clarifier 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author strongly acknowledges Prof. Francesco Avezzù for his great support and for his contributions and suggestions in the revision of this chapter.

References

  1. 1.
    Wilderer PA, Schreff D (2000) Decentralised and centralised wastewater management: a challenge for developers. Water Sci Technol 41:1–8Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    IPPC (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) (2003) Reference document on best available techniques in common wastewater and waste gas treatment/management systems in the chemical sector. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Libralato G, Volpi Ghirardini A, Avezzù F (2012) To centralise or to decentralise: an overview of the most recent trends in wastewater treatment management. J Environ Manage 94:61–68. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.07.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Orth H (2007) Centralised versus decentralised wastewater systems? Water Sci Technol 56:259–266Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Newmann PWG (1993) Prioritising urban water research – an urban planning viewpoint. In: Proceedings of urban water research forum AWWA, Gold CoastGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jefferson B, Laine AL, Judd SJ, Stephenson T (2000) Membrane bioreactors and their role in wastewater reuse. Water Sci Technol 41:197–204Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sayers D (1998) A study of domestic grey water recycling. In: Interim report, National Water Demand Management Centre, Environment Agency, Worthing, UKGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holden B, Ward M (1998) An overview of domestic and commercial reuse of water. In: Presented at water recycling and effluent reuse, London, UK, 16 DecemberGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Borsuk ME, Maurer M, Lienert J, Larsen TA (2008) Charting a path for innovative toilet technology using multicriteria decision analysis. Environ Sci Technol 42:1855–1862. doi: 10.1021/es702184p CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deininger A, Wilderer PA (1999) Small wastewater treatment plants IV. Water Science and Technology 41(1):viiGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bakir HA (2001) Sustainable wastewater management for small communities in the Middle East and North Africa. J Environ Manag 61:319–328. doi: 10.1006/jema.2000.0414 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hong SW, Choi Y-S, Kim SJ, Kwon G (2005) Pilot-testing an alternative on-site wastewater treatment system for small communities and its automatic control. Water Sci Technol 51:101–108Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    De Fraja Frangipane E, Pastorelli G (1997) Piccoli Impianti di Depurazione e Manuale di Progettazione. CIPA, MilanGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Avezzù F, Faletti L, Riganti V (2010) La gestione dei piccoli impianti di depurazione. CIPA, MilanGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ho G, Anda M (2004) Centralised versus decentralised wastewater systems in an urban context: the sustainability dimension. In: Second IWA Leading Edge on Sustainability in Water-Limited Environments, pp 81–89. IWA Publishing, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ødegaard H (1997) Preface: small wastewater treatment plants III. Water Sci Technol 51:viiGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nolde E (2007) Possibilities of rainwater utilisation in densely populated areas including precipitation runoffs from traffic surfaces. Desalination 215:1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2006.10.033 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Otterpohl R, Braun U, Oldenburg M (2003) Innovative technologies for decentralised wastewater management in urban and peri-urban areas. Water Sci Technol 48:133–138Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gruening H, Hoppe H, Messmann S, Giga A (2011) Cost effectiveness of centralised and decentralised storm water treatment. Water Sci Technol 63:2598–2604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li F, Wichmann K, Otterpohl R (2010) Review of the technological approaches for grey water treatment and reuses. Sci Total Environ 407:3439–3449. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peter-Fröhlich A, Pawlowski L, Bonhomme A, Oldenburg M (2007) EU demonstration project for separate discharge and treatment of urine, faeces and greywater – part I: results. Water Sci Technol 56:239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Randall CW (2003) Changing needs for appropriate excreta disposal and small wastewater treatment methodologies or The future technology of small wastewater treatment systems. Water Sci Technol 48:1–6Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ronen T (2011) Extensive systems with intensive process for decentralized communities. In: Proceedings IWA conference on small sustainable solutions for water, Venice, Italy, 18–22 April 2011Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    UNEP (2002) Environmentally sound technologies for wastewater and stormwater management – an international Source book, IWA Publishing/UNEP – International Environmental Technology Centre, London/Osaka. http://www.unep.or.jp
  25. 25.
    Tchobanoglous G, Ruppe L, Leverenz H, Darby J (2004) Decentralized wastewater management: challenges and opportunities for the twenty-first century. Water Sci Technol Water Supply 4:95–102Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    CSO (2007) Census 2006, principal demographic results. Central Statistics Office, Government of Ireland. Stationary Office, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gill LW (2011) Recent developments in on-site wastewater treatment legislation for Ireland. In: Proceedings of IWA conference on small sustainable solutions for water, Venice, Italy, 18–22 April 2011Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ho G (2005) Technology for sustainability: the role of on site, small and community scale technology. Water Sci Technol 51:15–20Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dee T, Sivil D (2001) Selecting package wastewater treatment works. In: CIRIA project report 72, Construction Industry Research and Information Association, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hunt J, Anda M, Mathew K, Ho G, Priest G (2005) Emerging approaches to integrated urban water management: cluster scale application. Water Sci Technol 51:21–27Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fane AG, Fane SA (2005) The role of membrane technology in sustainable centralised wastewater systems. Water Sci Technol 51:317–325Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Griffin P (2001) Small works strategy – the role of package plants. In: Proceedings from IWEX 2001 – technology seminar on package treatment plants: solutions for AMP3 and beyond, pp 26–32. School of Water Sciences, Cranfield University, UKGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tchobanoglous G (2003) The strategic importance of decentralised wastewater management in the twenty-first century. In: Proceedings IDA conference on water reuse and desalination, Singapore, 25–26 FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fane SA, Ashbolt N, White SB (2002) Decentralised urban water reuse: the implications of system scale for cost and pathogens risk. Water Sci Technol 46:281–288Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Del Solar J, Hudson S, Stephenson T (2005) On-site treatment of a motorway service area wastewater using a package sequencing batch reactor (SBR). Water Sci Technol 51:311–316Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jeffrey P, Seaton R, Parsons S, Stephenson T (1997) Evaluation methods for the design of adaptive water supply systems in urban environments. Water Sci Technol 35:45–51Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Daude D, Stephenson T (2004) Cost-effective treatment solutions for rural areas: design and operation of a new package treatment plant for single households. Water Sci Technol 48:107–114Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Green W, Ho G (2005) Small scale sanitation technologies. Water Sci Technol 51:29–38Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Brown V, Jackson DW, Khalifé M (2010) 2009 Melbourne metropolitan sewerage strategy: a portfolio of decentralised and on-site concept designs. Water Sci Technol 62:510–517. doi: 10.2166/wst.2010.296 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    MAV (Magistrato alle Acque di Venezia) (2007) In: Ferrari G, Tromellini E (eds) Venezia, una scelta obbligata. I trattamenti individuali di depurazione. Marsilio, VeniceGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nolde E (2005) Greywater recycling systems in Germany – results, experiences and guidelines. Water Sci Technol 51:203–210Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lamichhane KM (2007) On-site sanitation: a viable alternative to modern wastewater treatment plants. Water Sci Technol 55:433–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Larsen TA, Maurer M, Udert KM, Lienert J (2007) Nutrient cycles and resource management: implications for the choice of wastewater treatment technology. Water Sci Technol 56:229–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lienert J, Burki T, Escher BI (2007) Reducing micropollutants with source control: substance flow analysis of 212 pharmaceuticals in faeces and urine. Water Sci Technol 56:87–96. doi: 10.2166/wst.2007.560 Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Larsen TA, Alder AC, Eggen RIL, Maurer M, Lienert J (2009) Source separation: will we see a paradigm shift in wastewater handling? Environ Sci Technol 43:6121–6125. doi: 10.1021/es803001r CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    McCann B (2010) Exploiting wastewater potential through nutrient recovery research. Water 21:39–41Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Palmér Rivera M, Ridderstolpe P, Reimer K-A (2011) Blackwater separation and reuse with vacuum toilets in a local activity centre in Sweden. In: Proceedings IWA conference on small sustainable solutions for water, Venice, Italy, 18–22 April 2011Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Beler Baykal B, Kocaturk NP (2011) Recovery of plant nutrients from dilute solutions of human urine. In: Proceedings IWA conference on small sustainable solutions for water, Venice, Italy, 18–22 April 2011Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Crites RW, Tchobanoglous G (1998) Small and decentralized wastewater management systems. MacGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Maurer M, Rothenberger D, Larsen TA (2006) Decentralised wastewater treatment technologies from a national perspective: at what cost are they competitive? Water Sci Technol 5:145–154Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Otis R (1996) Small diameter gravity sewers: experience in the Unites States. In: Mara D (ed) Low-cost sewerage. Wiley, Chichester, pp 123–133Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Crites RW, Middlebrooks EJ, Reed SD (2006) Natural wastewater treatment systems. Taylor and Francis, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tidaker P, Sjoberg C, Jonsson H (2007) Local recycling of plant nutrients from small-scale wastewater system to farmland – a Swedish scenario study. Resour Conserv Recycl 49:388–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Van Lier JB, Lettinga G (1999) Appropriate technologies for effective management of industrial and domestic wastewaters: the decentralised approach. Water Sci Technol 40:171–183Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Libralato G, Anselmi M, Avezzù F (2008) Criteri di scelta tra centralizzazione e i piccoli impianti decentralizzati. In: Proceedings of the 36th Giornata di Studio di Ingegneria Sanitaria-Ambientale: La Gestione dei Piccoli Impianti di Depurazione, Piacenza, Italy, 11 AprilGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Weber B, Cornel P, Wagner M (2007) Semi-centralised supply and treatment systems for (fast growing) urban areas. Water Sci Technol 55:349–356. doi: 10.2166/wst.2010.189 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rauch W, Brockmann D, Peters I, Larsen TA, Gujer W (2003) Combining urine separation with waste design: an analysis using a stochastic model for urine production. Water Res 37:681–689. doi: 10.1016/S0043-1354(02)00364-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ronteltap M, Maurer M, Gujer W (2007) The behaviour of pharmaceuticals and heavy metals during struvite precipitation in urine. Water Res 41:1859–1868. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2007.01.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Liang X, van Dijk MP (2010) Financial and economic feasibility of decentralized wastewater reuse systems in Beijing. Water Sci Technol 61:1965–1973. doi: 10.2166/wst.2010.105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Engin GO, Demir I (2006) Cost analysis of alternative methods for wastewater handling in small communities. J Environ Manage 79:357–363. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.07.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Larsen TA (2011) Redesigning wastewater infrastructure to improve resource efficiency. Water Sci Technol 63:2535–2541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Chung G, Lansey K, Blowers P, Brooks P, Ela W, Stewart S, Wilson P (2008) A general water supply planning model: evaluation of decentralized treatment. Environ Modell Softw 23:893–905. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2007.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Krozer Y, Hophmayer-Tokich S, van Meerendonk H, Tijsma S, Vos E (2010) Innovations in the water chain – experiences in the Netherlands. J Clean Prod 18:439–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    EC, European Commission (1996) Council directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control. Off J L 257:26–40Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    COM (Commission of the European Communities) (2004) Stimulating technologies for sustainable development: an environmental technologies action plan for the European union, 38 final, Brussels, 28 January 2004Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rio de Janeiro Conference (1992) United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) 3–14 June. Rio de Janeiro, BrasilGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    UNCED, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (1993) Agenda 21: earth summit – the United Nations programme of action from Rio – transfer of environmentally sound technology, cooperation and capacity-building. United Nations, United States, 23 April 1993Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lomborg B (2001) The skeptical environmentalist. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Metcalf, Eddy Inc (2003) Wastewater engineering: treatment and reuse, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kazmi AA, Furumai H (2000) Field investigation on reactive settling in an intermittent aeration sequencing batch reactor activated sludge process. Water Sci Technol 41:127–135Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Irvine R, Ketchum L (1989) Sequencing batch reactors for biological wastewater treatment. Critic Rev Environ Control 18:255–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Wilderer PA, Irvine R, Goronszy M (2001) Sequencing batch reactor technology. In: Scientific and technical report no. 10. IWA Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    GURI (Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana) (2007) Emanazione delle line guida per l’individuazione e l’utilizzazione delle migliori tecniche disponibili in materiali di gestione dei rifiuti, per le attività elencate nell’allegato I del decreto legislativo 18 febbraio 2005, n. 59, GURI 133, 7 giugno 2007Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Furumai H, Nagasaka M, Sato Y (1998) Modelling of nitrogen removal in sequencing batch reactors treating domestic sewage. Indian J Eng Mater Sci 5:153–181Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hayakawa N, Tsuji J, Hamamoto Y (1986) Simultaneous nitrogen and phosphorus removal by intermittent cyclic process. Water Sci Technol 18:319–326Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Rusten B, Eliassen H (1993) Sequencing batch reactors for nutrient removal at small wastewater treatment plants. Water Sci Technol 28:233–242Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Yuyama Y, Fujino K, Miyamoto Y, Oonishi R (1993) Treatment system of wastewater from rural settlements with batch activated sludge process. Water Sci Technol 28:223–232Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Goronszy MC (1979) Intermittent operation of the extended aeration process for small systems. J Water Pollut Control Fed 51:274–287Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Irvine R, Ketchum L, Arora M, Barth E (1985) An organic loading study of full-scale sequencing batch reactors. J Water Pollut Control Fed 57:847–853Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Wett B, Rauch W (1996) Simulation of discontinuous treatment strategies. In: Preprint of first IAWQ specialised conference on sequencing batch reactor technology, Munich, Germany, 18–20 MarchGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Arora ML, Barth EF, Umphres MB (1985) Technology evaluation of sequencing batch reactors. Water Pollut Control Fed J 57:874Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Manning JF, Irvine RL (1985) The biological removal of phosphorus in a sequencing batch reactor. J Water Pollut Control Fed 57:87–94Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Chiesa SC, Irvine RL (1985) Growth and control of filamentous microbes in activated sludge: an integrated hypothesis. Water Res 19:471–479. doi: 10.1016/0043-1354(85)90039-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    De Fraja Frangipane E, Pastorelli G (1993) Impianti di depurazione di piccole dimensioni. CIPA, MilanGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Melcer H, Bedford WK, Topnik BH, Schmidtke NK (1987) Conversion of small municipal wastewater treatment plants to sequencing batch reactors. J Water Pollut Control Fed 59:79–85Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Edgerton BD, McNevin D, Wong CH, Menoud P, Barford JP, Mithchell CA (2000) Strategies for dealing with piggery effluent in Australia: the sequencing batch reactor as a solution. Water Sci Technol 41:123–126Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Stephenson T, Judd S, Jefferson B, Brindle K (2000) Membrane bioreactors for wastewater treatment. IWA Publishing, CornwallGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Ng HY, Hermanowicz SW (2005) Membrane bioreactor operation at short solids retention times: performance and biomass characteristics. Water Res 39:981–992. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2004.12.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Fane AG, Chang S (2002) Membrane bioreactors: design and operational options. Filtr Sep 39:26–29. doi: 10.1016/S0015-1882(02)80168-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Caetano A (1995) Membrane technology: applications to industrial wastewater treatment. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Gander MA, Jefferson B, Judd SJ (2000) Membrane bioreactors for use in small wastewater treatment plants: membrane materials and effluent quality. Water Sci Technol 41:205–211Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Parameshwaran K, Fane AG, Cho BD, Moosbruger R, Kim KJ (2002) Low energy treatment system for brewery water reuse. In: Proceedings of 2nd IWA world water congress, Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Eckenfelder WW Jr (2000) Industrial water pollution control, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Culp RL (1978) Handbook of advanced wastewater treatment. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    STOWA, Institute of Applied Water Research – NL (2005) Explanatory study for wastewater treatment techniques and the European Water Framework Directive. Report 34, STOWA, Utrecht, NetherlandGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Wanner O, Debus O, Reichert P (1994) Modelling the spatial distribution and dynamics of a xylene-degrading microbial population in a membrane-bound biofilm. Water Sci Technol 29:243–251Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Brindle K, Stephenson T, Semmens MJ (1998) Nitrification and oxygen utilisation in a membrane aeration bioreactor. Water Environ Res 71:1347–1354. doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(98)00047-7 Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Libralato G, Volpi Ghirardini A, Avezzù F (2010) Toxicity removal efficiency of decentralised sequencing batch reactor and ultra-filtration membrane bioreactors. Water Res 44:4437–4450. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2010.06.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    McCann B (2008) Centralised control for Venice’s decentralised wastewater treatment. Water 21(10):51–52Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Cornel P, Krause S (2006) Membrane bioreactors in industrial wastewater treatment – European experiences, examples and trends. Water Sci Technol 53:37–44. doi: 10.2166/wst.2006.074 Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Houten R, Eikelboom D (1997) High performance membrane bioreactors: a physiological approach. In: MBR1 – proceedings of the first international meeting on membrane bioreactors for wastewater treatment, p 7. Cranfield University, Cranfield, UKGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Muller EB, Stouthamer AH, van Verseveld HW, Eikelboom D (1995) Aerobic domestic wastewater treatment in a pilot plant with complete sludge retention by cross-flow filtration. Water Res 29:1179–1189. doi: 10.1016/0043-1354(94)00267-B CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Shimizu Y, Uryu K, Okuno Y, Watanabe A (1996) Crossflow microfiltration of activated sludge using submerged membrane with air bubbling. J Ferment Bioeng 81:55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Fane AG (1996) Membranes for water production and wastewater reuse. Desalination 106:1–9. doi: 10.1016/S0011-9164(96)00085-9 Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Trussell R, Adham S, Tchobanoglous G (2003) Testing protocols for membrane selection: equivalency and fate, organism/pathogen removal. In: Proceedings of IDA conference on water reuse and desalination, Singapore, 25–26 FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    AUEPA, Environment Protection Authority (1995) Managing sewage discharges to inland waters, publication 473. State Government of Victoria, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Ottoson J, Hansen A, Björlenius B, Norder H, Stenström TA (2006) Removal of viruses, parasitic protozoa and microbial indicators in conventional and membrane processes in a wastewater pilot plant. Water Res 40:1449–1457. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2006.01.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Rose JB, Gerba CP (1991) Assessing potential health risks from viruses and parasites in reclaimed water in Arizona and Florida, USA. Water Sci Technol 23:2091–2098Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Fleischer J, Schlafmann K, Otchwemach R, Botzenhart K (2000) Elimination of enteroviruses, other enteric viruses, F-specific coliphages, somatic coliphages and E. coli in four sewage treatment plants of southern Germany. J Water Supply Res Technol 49:127–138Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Jacangelo JG, Loughran O, Petrik B, Simpson D, McIlroy C (2003) Removal of enteric viruses and selected microbial indicators by UV irradiation of secondary effluent. Water Sci Technol 47:193–198Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Owen G, Bandi M, Howell JA, Churchoues SJ (1995) Economic assessment of membrane processes for water and wastewater treatment. J Membr Sci 102:77–91. doi: 10.1016/0376-7388(94)00261-V CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Lesjean B, Rosenberger S, Schrotter JC (2004) Membrane aided biological wastewater treatment – overview of some applied systems and their fields of application. Membr Technol 8:5–10. doi: 10.1016/S0958-2118(04)00200-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Cheryan M (1998) Ultrafiltration and microfiltration handbook. Technomic Publishing AG, BaselGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Liu Z, He Y, Li F, Liu Y (2006) Photocatalytic treatment of RDX wastewater with nano-sized titanium dioxide. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 13:328–32. doi: 10.1065/espr2006.08.328 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Sourirajan S (1970) Reverse osmosis. Academic Press Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and StatisticsUniversity Cà Foscari VeniceVeniceItaly
  2. 2.ECSIN - European Center for the Sustainable Impact of Nanotechnology – Veneto Nanotech S.C.p.A.RovigoItaly

Personalised recommendations